[Sahil-Das]

In my opinion, AI generated output should be copyrightable as long as, and only if, the person using AI prompted it to generate the output based on an idea they originally had. If the idea itself was AI generated, I don't think it deserves copyright. But if the idea was original and AI was just used as a system to do the heavy lifting (coding etc.), then I don't see an issue with being able to copyright the output. This is just my opinion.

[robalni]

Do you think it makes a difference to replace the AI with another human then?

If I have an original idea and ask you to do the work, should I get copyright?

[ksaj]

You might bring ghost writers into this discussion.

If an AI did all the work, then it "traditionally" isn't copyrightable because it was generated algorithmically off other people's work, and not your own. A ghost writer willingly gives up their claim to their work, which surely is based on everything they've ever read before, too.

How different is that really? Definitely worth the input of a few differing voices.

[Sahil-Das]

Yes. Because the idea is still yours. I am merely executing what you tell me to do, and that means I am not intellectually involved in the idea at the same level as you are. It was not my idea to begin with. If you let AI execute your idea, the idea is still yours, and execution was done upon your command and according to your ideas, hence, the output generated should be copyrightable.